OpenText™ ALM/Quality Center, formerly from Micro Focus, serves as the single pane of glass for software quality management. It helps users to govern application lifecycle management activities and implement rigorous, auditable lifecycle processes.
N/A
Pricing
OpenText ALM/Quality Center
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
OpenText ALM/Quality Center
Free Trial
No
Free/Freemium Version
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
—
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
OpenText ALM/Quality Center
Considered Both Products
OpenText ALM/Quality Center
Verified User
Project Manager
Chose OpenText ALM/Quality Center
We ultimately opted for the Micro Focus ALM / Quality Center since it offers best in class features and good value for money.
We have various criteria as a part of the requirements in which we gathered from teams. We started evaluating each requirement across the tools, and we started providing score ranges from 1-10 and the Quality center holds top to that. Some of them are listed below:
Firstly, it's a management decision to use HP Quality Center. But if you ask me why I would recommend Quality Center over other products is majorly because of automated regression testing, user interface, security/authorization restrictions and reporting features.
Other …
ALM/QC does not stack up too well against other lifecycle management products, in my opinion. ALM/QC does good in certain areas, such as the quick assigning of tasks to be done, but it falls short in too many areas in terms of being a realistic product to use for the different …
We have selected ServiceNow (SNOW) in lieu of HP Application Lifecycle Management. SNOW allows complete integration into our internal corporate web-based systems where ALM does not. Because of this complete integration, we are able to provide users with a consistent user …
We require a project management tool for waterfall projects with very heavy testing cycles (4-5 regression cycles), definitely no other tool in the market provides the level of support for test management that HP ALM provides.
Quality Center does a great job on its own and is still a very competitive tool. However, with newer methodologies coming and most of the companies moving towards Agile, it requires an upgrade - without which, it will not survive. It has done a great job so far for years …
We require a project management tool for waterfall projects with very heavy testing cycles (4-5 regression cycles), definitely no other tool in the market provides the level of support for test management that HP ALM provides.
HP is unique in its own way. We chose HP because it is standard and an end-to-end solution. However, we also use other tools for the same work that we currently do. HP is good for waterfall projects. It has an excellent defect management module.
HP ALM has always been the best tool in the industry for QA management. Thoroughly trusted and used by the top-notch organization through the industry. The USP is the total coverage of Test Cycle which other tools lack.
I was not responsible for selection of ALM. Given the size of the company of the client I am engaged with who is using it, I would have picked something with similar features like Rally or VersionOne. These tools are far easier to use - less clicks! The choice, however, was …
HP Quality Center and IBM Rational Team Concert have an option for a sync up which allows a person to automatically create a defect on rational team concert from a Quality Center note just by using a sync up button. Though HP quality centre does not give us many options to …
There is a desire from some areas in the company to move to TFS and Microsoft Test Manager. The issue with the MS tool set is that they are more geared for developers rather than testers and business users, so great for Agile (assuming developers do carry out testing) but if …
For requirements, we have also reviewed Blue Print, Version One, etc. Currently, the go forward solution is being decided. Whatever the final requirements application is, integration with HP ALM will be done to support traceability.
We have other tools in our organization like Atlassian JIRA and Microsoft Team Foundation Server, which are very capable tools but very narrow in their approach and feature set and does not come even close to the some of the core capabilities of HP ALM.
We have had ALM back when it was called QC (Quality Center) and this was before my time, so I cannot say why it was chosen over other applications. I do know that it has been our defacto standard for many years now and all users of the program are very happy with it.
HP needs to have better support for agile testing as compared to JIRA. JIRA also has some powerful integration using REST APIs. Silk Test's portability enables users to test applications more effectively with lower complexity and cost in comparison to HP QC.
HP ALM is the best for tracking testing no questions about it, it is more robust and mature than JIRA or IBM Rational. It has the capability to track not only test, requirements and even software or project development. Reports can be easily configured and produced from ALM, …